Wheels within wheels.

[Kinser79]

(08-26-2018, 10:07 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(08-25-2018, 04:08 AM)Galen Wrote: At every turn you demonstrate your utter lack of knowledge in economics.  Commodity money does not have to outpace population growth.  What you will get as productivity increases will be a 1% to 2% price deflation every year which is what happened in the US through the late nineteenth and into the early twentieth century.  Think for a moment even if wages remained static then purchasing power of money would increase.  Instead of the poor losing ground every year they would be coming out ahead just by saving with out any risk at all.

Did it ever occur to that having the Fed creating money that is then handed to already wealthy politically connected interests is contributing to [url="https://www.clevelandfed.org/newsroom-and-events/publications/economic-commentary/2017-economic-commentaries/ec-201701-monetary-policy-and-inequality.aspx]wealth inequality[/url] you libtards keep whining about.  Even the idiots at the Fed are starting to figure this one out.

You are so stupid that someone has to remind you to keep breathing.

Oh sure!  Why didn't I think of that.  The poor can just save their money … that extra money they never have, living paycheck to paycheck, while the rich just spend all theirs and not save even more than they already do.  Is this a serious comment?  Even more to the point, at what point in history has this ever happened?  Serious: no (I hope).  When: never!

Sometimes I have to wonder just how capable you libertarians are for self-delusion.  It appears boundless.

It seems to me the only thing that is boundless is the self-deception participated in by Boomers in general and the so-called "blue" Boomers in particular.

In a generally deflationary cycle of say 1-2% deflation the poor's purchasing power would increase yearly.  Those increases would allow them to save at first small amounts of money, and later larger amounts of money.  Not only has this happened before, but it happened in particular with my grandparents who were GI generation.  Their parents were core Losts whose parents were slaves.  The savings that their parents had managed to get them some starting capital with which they eventually bought assets which lead to more savings and more capital.

That being said, it seems to me that the main thing that determines if one ends up being rich or being poor is determined by a systemic approach to finances and economic activity.  In general, the poor and middle-classes have over time tended to purchase with their purchasing power liabilities.  The rich on the other hand tend to purchase assets.